Post ALwTko6JsBSx43Vgem by jason@cb.janusworx.com
(DIR) More posts by jason@cb.janusworx.com
(DIR) Post #ALveF8bqzXnlk3OxPM by unfa@mastodon.social
2022-07-27T20:12:50Z
0 likes, 8 repeats
Don't buy open-source software from 3rd parties!Here's Mixxx, sold by a scammer on the Microsoft Store: https://apps.microsoft.com/store/detail/mixxx/9MW1XLFCV982Don't buy it. Get it for free from Mixxx.org and donate to the developers if you want to help the project. They are never going to make you pay for it!From the Mixxx developers:"Mixxx is and always will be free! There’s no such thing as a free trial, it always provides all features and the source code is publicly available."#Scam #Mixxx #FOSS #OpenSource #Libre
(DIR) Post #ALw1tCfZc7acrYDOjY by james@mstdn.starnix.network
2022-07-28T01:31:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@unfa Microsoft should get rid of this like they said they would. (If not then they're doing something else which only causes side effects.)
(DIR) Post #ALwNpEgUNYykwd9lzM by redstarfish@social.linux.pizza
2022-07-28T05:37:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@unfa But why are you calling them scammers, they have the right to sell it.Though I agree that donating to original developers would be best.
(DIR) Post #ALwQ37CdBxlHhfw8qe by kuba@toot.kuba-orlik.name
2022-07-28T06:02:00Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@redstarfish @unfa they have the right? Does the license allow them to do that?
(DIR) Post #ALwTko6JsBSx43Vgem by jason@cb.janusworx.com
2022-07-28T06:18:17.343054Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@kuba @redstarfish @unfa if it’s GPL software then yes, they can sell it.But then they also have to contribute any changes they make, back upstream. and provide source code.
(DIR) Post #ALwTkoYgAk9QU0mKrQ by redstarfish@social.linux.pizza
2022-07-28T06:43:31Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@jasoncontributing changes upstream is not required though. But since they need to publish their changes under the same terms, upstream can merge it if they want to.
(DIR) Post #ALwmaMQPoZDvSjdrxA by unfa@mastodon.social
2022-07-28T10:13:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
There's an article from Mixxx developers about these kinds of situations:https://mixxx.org/news/2020-05-22-you-dont-need-to-pay-for-mixxx/
(DIR) Post #ALwmaMsQ8RcorakEbY by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2022-07-28T10:14:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@unfa broken link
(DIR) Post #ALwmg5PzxSpCSFB35c by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2022-07-28T10:15:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@unfa fixed link:https://mixxx.org/news/2020-05-22-you-dont-need-to-pay-for-mixxx/
(DIR) Post #ALwodkgSHGuJTbtCTI by unfa@mastodon.social
2022-07-28T10:37:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wolf480pl Thanks, I've reposted the toot.
(DIR) Post #ALwpzAvrysLiv8sXYG by unfa@mastodon.social
2022-07-28T10:37:16Z
0 likes, 3 repeats
There's an article from Mixxx developers about these kinds of situations:https://mixxx.org/news/2020-05-22-you-dont-need-to-pay-for-mixxx/
(DIR) Post #ALx2mCj9IMwI7v4dxA by SapphireDrew@mastodon.online
2022-07-28T13:15:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@redstarfish @unfa That doesn't make it any less of a rip off or a dick move to sell somebody something that you know is available for free while hoping they don't know any better.
(DIR) Post #ALxJyyeOdqMtSDWl4y by iska@mstdn.starnix.network
2022-07-28T16:28:45Z
2 likes, 0 repeats
@unfa Don't buy open-source software from 3rd parties!I sold free software just last week, am I an evil scammer :02_wut:
(DIR) Post #ALxKAUFxTL4AfBaK7E by 404zzz@stereophonic.space
2022-07-28T16:30:50.936310Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@iska @unfa :thinkTux: Aren't they okay to sell? :blobjoy:
(DIR) Post #ALxLPDghSLz1ZfgLjc by iska@mstdn.starnix.network
2022-07-28T16:44:41Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@404zzz @unfa FSF/GNU sells Trisquel with membership.
(DIR) Post #ALxLgRmeIjKSDOgBHc by 404zzz@stereophonic.space
2022-07-28T16:47:48.666697Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@iska @unfa haha lol yeah.
(DIR) Post #ALxyGRvH3drzKVJ9U0 by Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com
2022-07-29T00:00:06.813958Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jason >But then they also have to contribute any changes they make, back upstream. and provide source code. This is NOT what any version of the GPL requires, please read both versions before making any further comments: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.htmlSource code only needs to be provided to people who actually receive the software.If upstream doesn't receive a copy of the software, no changes need to be contributed to upstream.
(DIR) Post #ALxybhZu2xuJxtRh9k by Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com
2022-07-29T00:03:57.130918Z
1 likes, 2 repeats
@404zzz Yes, if you can't sell it, it's not free software: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html#four-freedomsThe problem with Linux is that the current developers can't comply with their own license (due to a bunch of proprietary software contained within and drivers that are derivative works of proprietary firmware without necessary exceptions from all developers): https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.htmlGNU Linux-libre has all that crap stripped out, so such is safe to sell if you can find a buyer.
(DIR) Post #ALyMuKdDz0kJCSPpWy by jason@cb.janusworx.com
2022-07-29T04:04:05.230204Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@SapphireDrew @redstarfish @unfa sad, but true (the whole it might not be ethical or moral, but it is legal thing …)
(DIR) Post #ALyMuL9U34YAoVVaoS by redstarfish@social.linux.pizza
2022-07-29T04:36:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jason @SapphireDrew @unfa If the 3rd party distributor complies with the license, I see nothing amoral about it. Since in both cases the software is still *free* but not gratis.Distributions like RedHat, Suse, Elementary os, charges money while distributing GNU/Linux, which one may get gratis. As those practices not amoral either, nor is this one.
(DIR) Post #ALyYif6tDYjmghUdQO by cnx@nixnet.social
2022-07-29T06:10:11.441464Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
hoping they don’t know any better.FWIW @SapphireDrew, attribution clauses in most free software licenses requires redistributors to disclose the original works. All of them also forbid restricting others from selling the software. Compliance is what sets the difference between distributions and scammers, regardless if money is charged.Cc: @redstarfish and @unfa
(DIR) Post #ALyuHK6HQCw6hRZpdA by unfa@mastodon.social
2022-07-29T10:50:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@redstarfish @jason @SapphireDrew What is amoral is deceiving the customer by silently implying that this is a commercial product published by it's developer.With pail Linux distros it is clear that you're paying for added value, not for the GPL-licensed packages.There is no added value in putting verbatim FOSS builds behind a paywall, unless you're the project's developer and you clearly state that the software can be built from source (like Ardour does for example).This practice is evil.
(DIR) Post #ALyv6aX65MhQQuZ7eC by SapphireDrew@mastodon.online
2022-07-29T10:59:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@redstarfish @jason @unfa True, but the charges in most of those examples are not for the software itself; they're selling labor (tech support), materials (physical copies), etc. except for Elementary which is donationware since paying zero is an option; but I digress.The immoral thing here is not a developer selling their own software, but random people on the Internet trying to sell something that the dev is freely giving away while hoping the buyer doesn't know any better.